SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(SC) 1043

H.L.DATTU, CHANDRAMAULI KR.PRASAD
ASHOK KUMAR MAGABHAI VANKAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent


ORDER

1. The High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No.301 of 1998 has affirmed the judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sabarkantha at Himatnagar in Sessions Case No.32 of 1996. Being aggrieved by these judgments and orders, the appellant is before us in this appeal.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant, initially, would submit that the conviction and sentence awarded by the Trial Court under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'I.P.C.') requires to be converted into an offence under Section 304 Part II of I.P.C. In support of that submission, learned counsel has taken us through a portion of the evidence and the conclusions reached by both the Trial Court and the High Court. In our view, it would be suffice to refer only to para 31 of the judgment of the High Court to find out whether the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant requires to be accepted.

3. Para 31 of the judgment of the High Court reads as under :

"31. Viewed in the light of the aforesaid decision, in the instant case it is true that the respondent had dealt one single blow on the head of the deceased with a wooden pestle. The said wooden p


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top